On Sat, Feb 27, 2010 at 03:00:39PM +0200, Ville Skyttä wrote:
> On Friday 26 February 2010, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 01:12:53PM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> > > On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 17:14 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
>
> > > > Also repoquery returns F12 results but accepts --releas
On Friday 26 February 2010, Till Maas wrote:
> On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 01:12:53PM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> > On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 17:14 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > > Also repoquery returns F12 results but accepts --releasever:
> > > $ repoquery --releasever=rawhide --repoid=fedora kernel
> >
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 15:33 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Jesse Keating (jkeat...@redhat.com) said:
> > On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 12:18 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > >
> > > Mainly, it removes the repository definitions in rawhide that don't make
> > > sense - the release, updates, updates-test
Jesse Keating (jkeat...@redhat.com) said:
> On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 12:18 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> >
> > Mainly, it removes the repository definitions in rawhide that don't make
> > sense - the release, updates, updates-testing, etc. repos won't work anyway
> > unless you change $releasever
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 01:12:53PM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 17:14 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> > On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 04:29:31PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> >
> > > New:
> > > yum --releasever= upgrade
> > >
> > > Am I missing something? Do people think this would
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 17:14 +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 04:29:31PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
> > New:
> > yum --releasever= upgrade
> >
> > Am I missing something? Do people think this would be better, or worse?
>
> Is the releasever option a yum F13 feature? On F1
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 12:18 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
> Mainly, it removes the repository definitions in rawhide that don't make
> sense - the release, updates, updates-testing, etc. repos won't work anyway
> unless you change $releasever in some way.
It would help making the transition fr
Jesse Keating (jkeat...@redhat.com) said:
> > > I muffed up fedora-release on rawhide, but here was my plan.
> > >
> > > rawhide:
> > > fedora-release requires fedora-release-rawhide
> > > All repos except for rawhide disabled. Rawhide enabled.
> > > This state never changes, the only thin
On Fri, 2010-02-26 at 11:42 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Jesse Keating (jkeat...@redhat.com) said:
> > On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 16:29 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > > Am I missing something? Do people think this would be better, or
> > > worse?
> >
> > I muffed up fedora-release on rawhide, bu
Till Maas (opensou...@till.name) said:
> Is the releasever option a yum F13 feature? On F12 it complains that
> it is not a valid option.
>
> Also repoquery returns F12 results but accepts --releasever:
> $ repoquery --releasever=rawhide --repoid=fedora kernel
> kernel-0:2.6.31.5-127.fc12.x86_64
Jesse Keating (jkeat...@redhat.com) said:
> On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 16:29 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> > Am I missing something? Do people think this would be better, or
> > worse?
>
> I muffed up fedora-release on rawhide, but here was my plan.
>
> rawhide:
> fedora-release requires fedora-r
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 04:29:31PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> New:
> yum --releasever= upgrade
>
> Am I missing something? Do people think this would be better, or worse?
Is the releasever option a yum F13 feature? On F12 it complains that
it is not a valid option.
Also repoquery return
On Fri, Feb 26, 2010 at 09:53:16AM +0100, Till Maas wrote:
> On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 05:05:38PM -0500, James Antill wrote:
>
> > $releasever just changes the variable, so the URLs are all the same ...
> > just with different variables. Specifically:
> >
> > mirrorlist=https://mirrors.fedoraproje
2010/2/25 James Antill :
> On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 16:29 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
>> Going over the various usage cases:
>>
>> 1) Release has not yet branched, want to switch, or use rawhide packges
>>
>> Currently:
>> yum install fedora-release-rawhide
>> yum --enablerepo=rawhide ...
>>
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 04:29:31PM -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Am I missing something? Do people think this would be better, or worse?
It makes it harder to run repoquery against rawhide, because one would
need to adjust the releasever value everytime rawhide is branched. But
if --releasever=
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 05:05:38PM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> $releasever just changes the variable, so the URLs are all the same ...
> just with different variables. Specifically:
>
> mirrorlist=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=fedora-$releasever&arch=$basearch
>
> ...is never
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 05:05:38PM -0500, James Antill wrote:
> $releasever just changes the variable, so the URLs are all the same ...
> just with different variables. Specifically:
>
> mirrorlist=https://mirrors.fedoraproject.org/metalink?repo=fedora-$releasever&arch=$basearch
>
> ...is never
On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 16:29 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Am I missing something? Do people think this would be better, or
> worse?
I muffed up fedora-release on rawhide, but here was my plan.
rawhide:
fedora-release requires fedora-release-rawhide
All repos except for rawhide disabled. Ra
On Thu, 2010-02-25 at 16:29 -0500, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Going over the various usage cases:
>
> 1) Release has not yet branched, want to switch, or use rawhide packges
>
> Currently:
> yum install fedora-release-rawhide
> yum --enablerepo=rawhide ...
>
> New:
> yum --releasever= ...
On Thu, Feb 25, 2010 at 04:32:38PM -0500, Seth Vidal wrote:
> > streams, run "yum --releasever install/upgrade fedora-release"
> > yum --releasever= upgrade
> > Am I missing something? Do people think this would be better, or worse?
> gpg signatures.
> changing the releasever points to a differen
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Bill Nottingham wrote:
> Seth Vidal (skvi...@fedoraproject.org) said:
>>> Proposal: don't ship fedora-release-rawhide at all. To move between
>>> streams, run "yum --releasever install/upgrade fedora-release"
>>>
>>> yum --releasever= upgrade
>>>
>>> Am I missing something
Seth Vidal (skvi...@fedoraproject.org) said:
> > Proposal: don't ship fedora-release-rawhide at all. To move between
> > streams, run "yum --releasever install/upgrade fedora-release"
> >
> > yum --releasever= upgrade
> >
> > Am I missing something? Do people think this would be better, or worse
On Thu, 25 Feb 2010, Bill Nottingham wrote:
>
> Proposal: don't ship fedora-release-rawhide at all. To move between
> streams, run "yum --releasever install/upgrade fedora-release"
>
> yum --releasever= upgrade
>
> Am I missing something? Do people think this would be better, or worse?
>
gpg
Right now, we have the following:
F13 branched tree:
fedora-release - enabled - points to F13
fedora-release-rawhide - disabled - points to rawhide
Rawhide:
fedora-release - enabled - sets releasever to 14, ergo points to rawhide
fedora-release-rahwide - disabled - points to rawhide
This would i
24 matches
Mail list logo
